On 06/06/2011 03:52 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> At this point, I don't trust spawn at all (on Linux at least). I've
had too
> many problems with it.
Thank you.
I've spawned threads from within threads and now received
ThreadException and segmentation faults as well:
http://d.puremagic.
On 2011-06-06 14:37, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> On 06/06/2011 12:07 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> > On Mon, 06 Jun 2011 14:09:25 -0400, Ali Çehreli
wrote:
> >> First, the answer may be as simple as "use
> >> core.thread.thread_joinAll". Is that the proper way of waiting for all
> >> threads?
> >
>
On 06/06/2011 12:07 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jun 2011 14:09:25 -0400, Ali Çehreli wrote:
First, the answer may be as simple as "use
core.thread.thread_joinAll". Is that the proper way of waiting for all
threads?
main (the C main, not D main) does this already:
https://gith
On Mon, 06 Jun 2011 14:09:25 -0400, Ali Çehreli wrote:
First, the answer may be as simple as "use core.thread.thread_joinAll".
Is that the proper way of waiting for all threads?
main (the C main, not D main) does this already:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/druntime/blob/master/s
First, the answer may be as simple as "use core.thread.thread_joinAll".
Is that the proper way of waiting for all threads?
Second, my question may not be a valid example as starting a thread
without communicating with it may be under the umbrella of
parallelization. Maybe in concurrency, threa
